Our directory of things of interest

University Directory

Britain’s mascot debate reignites over Exeter Chiefs’ refusal to renounce Native American paraphernalia

  • Written by  Abigail Spink
  • Published in Cultures
Britain’s mascot debate reignites over Exeter Chiefs’ refusal to renounce Native American paraphernalia
26 Aug
2020
Exeter’s rugby team continues to find itself in the middle of a global dispute about the use of Native American mascots in sport – will a rebrand ever be on the cards?

Feather headdresses, tribal war paint and ceremonious battle cries have been characteristic of Exeter’s rugby scene since 1999 when its premiership team, fondly known as ‘the Chiefs’, followed the path of American sports franchises and adopted Native American iconography as part of a major rebrand. This soon meant that the figurehead of an Indian Chief was emblazoned on club merchandise, a puppet-like Big Chief mascot entertained crowds at half time, punters could buy drinks from the Mohawk and Wigwam bars, and fans began to brandish foam tomahawks and perform the infamous Tomahawk Chop to show support in the stands.

Stay connected with the Geographical newsletter!
signup buttonIn these turbulent times, we’re committed to telling expansive stories from across the globe, highlighting the everyday lives of normal but extraordinary people. Stay informed and engaged with Geographical.

Get Geographical’s latest news delivered straight to your inbox every Friday!

Now, as hundreds of sports teams across the US are reconsidering their imagery after lengthy protests from indigenous activists, including the Washington Redskins which recently became Washington Football team and the Cleveland Indians which dropped its red-faced caricature mascot Chief Wahoo last year, the Chiefs are increasingly finding themselves in hot water over their depiction and imitation of Native American people.

In 2016, Dr Rachel Herrmann, a historian at Cardiff University, connected Exeter’s branding to a long and historically violent tradition of non-indigenous people stereotyping, misappropriating and commercialising indigenous cultures. She explained in a blog post that like that of many American teams, the Chiefs fan culture stems from the unsettling colonial practice of playing Indian’ which made use of harmful and cliched tropes about Native Americans during the expansion of the frontier, concluding that: ‘the use of Native American imagery today stems from a sense that Euro-Americans have a right to Indianness, a right to remake it, and a right to profit from it.’

shutterstock 227682190Protesters at the 'Change the Mascot Rally' in 2014 call for the Washington Redskins to change its name

In the same year, Dr Stephanie Pratt, an Exeter-based academic and member of the Crow Creek Dakota (Sioux tribe) stated in an interview with the Express & Echo that attending a Chiefs match made her uncomfortable and angry, explaining that ‘this is a trivialisation of a culture, a people and their way of life. It is a product of bad Hollywood films and the Disneyfication of American Indian life and cultures. It should have no place in a sporting event.’

Four years on, even in the wake of a new anti-racism movement, the Chiefs are standing their ground in their refusal to reconsider club imagery. After heightened pressure, the club made a brief statement at the end of July, summarising that the use of the chiefs logo should be seen as an act of honour towards indigenous communities. It was concluded however that: ‘the one aspect which the board felt could be regarded as disrespectful was the club’s mascot – Big Chief – and as a mark of respect have decided to retire him.’

While the club has refused to comment further on the issue, a debate among fans has continued to reign across social media, with many firmly dismissing accusations of racist and derogatory behaviour, and critics pushing for a ‘much needed’ revision of iconography.

shutterstock 227682196Indigenous peoples have frequently raised the fact that they find  the use of their imagery offensive

Spearheading the movement is Exeter Chiefs for Change (ECFC), made up of both members and non-members of Native American communities. In response to the club’s decision to drop the mascot but keep all other elements of paraphernalia after a month-long campaign by the group, ECFC stated on their Facebook page: ‘It’s incredibly disappointing that Exeter Chiefs has thrown away this opportunity to show itself as an inclusive club. Indigenous peoples have made it clear time and time again that all uses of their imagery in this way are offensive, harmful, and unacceptable. Exeter’s refusal to fully listen to these pleas is tone-deaf and sticks two fingers up not only to them but to all minorities.’

A spokesperson from the group strongly refuted the common defence that indigenous iconography should be seen as a means of honouring the communities it seeks to represent, telling Geographical: ‘It’s hard to see how something which is a reductive caricature hotch-potch of the most stereotypical aspects of Native American culture, mixing outdated cartoon versions of elements from across different tribes can be an honour. We know that neither the club nor the fans have used the Native American-style imagery with negative connotations and that the association was always intended to be positive. However, now we have learned that is not how it is perceived by those the honour and respect was directed toward, intention becomes irrelevant.

‘We’ve heard from Indigenous peoples that the many issues with mascots include how they contribute to their loss of cultural identity by allowing others to control their image. They give an outdated image which further cements the perception from many that they are a historical or extinct group of people rather than a current, living, modern group, therefore also further undermining their efforts for equal rights in other areas.’

shutterstock 1094173796Fans attend a game between the Exeter Chiefs and Newcastle Falcons at Sandy Park in Exeter

ECFC’s comments point to the broader issue of representation and the lack of autonomy many indigenous people have over how they are perceived, discussed and depicted by the mainstream media. In 2001, Dr Debra Merskin wrote that the dominant way we have learned about Indianness is ‘from textbooks, movies, television programs, cartoons, songs, commercials, fanciful paintings, and product logos’, addressing how popular stereotypes such as the ‘mystical environmentalists or uneducated, alcoholic bingo-players confined to reservations’ have traversed generations and work to inform false understandings of Native American life, obscuring the lasting effects of colonial dispossession.

It remains possible however, that somewhere in the middle of the debate a middle ground can be located. In 2016, Dr Stephanie Pratt suggested that reaching out to, learning from and collaborating with an indigenous community would be an appropriate step for the Chiefs to take to eliminate the stereotypes informing their imagery. She offered to act as a go-between should the club wish to make contact. Similarly, Melanie Squire, co-founder of Iroquois Roots rugby in Ontario, in a recent letter to the Chiefs published by ECFC, condemned its use of imagery but offered her constructive advice, which would help ‘ensure rugby is an inclusive and safe space for all’.

Many are holding out for additional revisions after BT Sport announced its axing of the Tomahawk Chop chant from its manufactured crowd reactions last week, but the club’s enduring silence on the matter suggests little room for further negotiation. The Siksika Nation of Alberta, in an analogous turn of events, may be preparing to reclaim long sought after Crowfoot regalia from Exeter’s Royal Albert Memorial Museum in the coming months. It remains to be seen however whether the right to fair representation will ever be returned to those it was wrongfully taken from.

Get Geographical delivered to your door!
signup buttonGeographical has been in print since 1935, during which time we have reported on many thousands of global issues, allowing readers to look past the boundaries and borders of their world. Our monthly print magazine costs £9.50 for three months, or £38 for a year. We hope you will conisder joining us. 

Related items

NEVER MISS A STORY - Follow Geographical on Social

Want to stay up to date with breaking Geographical stories? Join the thousands following us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram and stay informed about the world.

More articles in PEOPLE...

I’m a Geographer

Emily Baxter is a 29-year-old wildlife veterinarian currently working at Ikhala…

Development

Covid-19 has reignited concerns about antibiotic resistance. The economics for…

Development

The Covid-19 vaccine allocation plan aims  to pool funding from high-, low-…

Development

The Department of Transport believes street works impact the UK…

Cultures

Life has slowed down as the pandemic has spread...

Cultures

Former headhunters engaged in a decades-long struggle for independence, the…

I’m a Geographer

Bonnie Ray is a biodiversity expert in the making. By…

Cultures

Across nearly every metric of cardiovascular health, US African Americans…

Development

The sudden cessation of international tourism as a result of…

Cultures

Hulking ice stupas dot the arid landscapes of northern India's…

Explorers

Setting off from the glacial source of the Ganges, where…

Explorers

In 1977, British adventurer George Meegan set out to attempt…

I’m a Geographer

Anjana Khatwa is an earth scientist, presenter and advocate for…

Development

Genome sequencing has become one of the main methods for…

Development

Sand is the single most mined commodity. Used to make…

Development

A report by Global Witness has revealed that conflict gold could…

Development

Control and relief action in Eastern Africa and the Greater…